Synthesizing concurrent interval performances

Concurrent schedules may be viewed as consisting of two pairs of stay and switch schedules, each pair associated with one of the alternatives. A stay schedule arranges reinforcers for staying and responding at one alternative, whereas the associated switch schedule arranges reinforcers for switching to the other alternative. In standard concurrent schedules, the stay schedule at each alternative is equivalent to the switch schedule at the other alternative. MacDonall (1999) exposed rats to one pair of stay and switch variable-ratio schedules and varied the response requirements across conditions. Combining results from symmetric pairs produced composite performances that were described by the generalized matching law. This outcome was noteworthy because the data were obtained from performances at two alternatives with contingencies that were functionally unrelated to each other. This result suggests that concurrent performances may consist of two unrelated performances that alternate as behavior moves between alternatives. The purpose of the present experiment was to extend those results to interval schedules. Rats were exposed to pairs of random-interval schedules, and across conditions their mean intervals were varied. When data from appropriately paired conditions were combined, the composite performances were consistent with the generalized matching law. In addition, the results supported two models of concurrent performances that were based on local variables at an alternative (behavior, and stay and switch reinforcers): a modified version of the contingency discrimination model (Davison & Jenkins, 1985) and the local model (MacDonall, 1999).     

The simultaneous maximization of congruence for two or more matrices under orthogonal rotation

While a rotation procedure currently exists to maximize simultaneously Tucker's coefficient of congruence between corresponding factors of two factor matrices under orthogonal rotation of one factor matrix, only approximate solutions are known for the generalized case where two or more matrices are rotated. A generalization and modification of the existing rotation procedure to simultaneously maximize the congruence is described. An example using four data matrices, comparing the generalized congruence maximization procedure with alternative rotation procedures, is presented. The results show a marked improvement of the obtained congruence using the generalized congruence maximization procedure compared to other procedures, without a significant loss of success with respect to the least squares criterion. A computer program written by the author to perform the rotations is briefly discussed.     

Choosing among natural stimuli

Pigeons worked on concurrent variable-interval, variable-interval schedules with the alternatives signaled by slides either containing trees or not. The schedules were designed to hold both overall and relative rates of reinforcement within narrowly constrained limits, and slides were quasi-randomly ordered each day. Responding to the two alternatives was well described by the generalized matching equation with substantial undermatching. Using an adaptation of the matching law, we estimated that the subjects were correctly classifying 82% to 95% of exemplars. The matching performance transferred to new exemplars of trees and nontrees with only slight generalization decrement. The pigeons appeared to be discriminating among exemplars even when the alternatives provided equal rates of reinforcement and the average relative performances were close to 50%.     

Income and choice between different goods

In Experiment 1, 3 rats chose between two simultaneously operating variable-interval schedules, one of which provided saccharin water and the other, food. In five conditions, the absolute (and equal) reinforcement rates provided by the pair of equal-valued schedules were manipulated in the range of 36 to 240 per hour. Experiment 2 was identical to Experiment 1 except that these schedules operated successively, arranged by requiring the rat to stand on the side of the chamber correlated with each schedule. Food/saccharin choice ratios were inversely related to reinforcement rate in both experiments, although this effect was stronger in Experiment 2. When delivery rates were high, preference for food over saccharin often reversed as the session progressed. The results were interpretable in terms of economic accounts of choice (e.g., the minimum-needs hypothesis), as well as in terms of traditional psychological accounts (e.g., matching theory).     

The generalized matching law as a description of multiple-schedule responding

The literature was examined to determine how well the generalized matching law (Baum, 1974) describes multiple-schedule responding. In general, it describes the data well, accounting for a median of 91% of the variance. The median size of the undermatching parameter was 0.46; the median bias parameter was 1.00. The size of the undermatching parameter, and the proportion of the variance accounted for by the equation, varied inversely with the number of schedules conducted, with the number of sessions conducted per schedule, and with the time within a component. The undermatching parameter also varied with the operanda used to produce reinforcers and with the reinforcer used. The undermatching parameter did not vary consistently with component duration or with several other variables. Bias was greater when fewer rather than more schedules were conducted, when two rather than one operanda were used, and when White Carneaux rather than homing pigeons served as subjects. These results imply that the generalized matching law may describe both concurrent and multiple-schedule responding, but that the same variables do not always influence the bias and undermatching parameters in the same way for the two types of schedules.     

An equation for behavioral contrast.

Pigeons were trained on a three-component multiple schedule in which the rates of reinforcement in the various components were systematically varied. Response rates were described by an equation that posits that the response-strengthening effects of reinforcement are inversely related to the context of reinforcement in which it occurs, and that the context is calculated as the weighted average of the various sources of reinforcement in the situation. The quality of fits was comparable to that found with previous quantitative analyses of concurrent schedules, especially for relative response rates, with over 90% of the variance accounted for in every case. As with previous research, reinforcements in the component that was to follow received greater weights in determining the context than did reinforcements in the preceding component.     

Quasi-dynamic choice models: Melioration and ratio invariance

There is continuing controversy about the behavioral process or processes that underlie the major regularities of free-operant choice such as molar matching and systematic deviations therefrom. A recent interchange between Vaughan and Silberberg and Ziriax concerned the relative merits of melioration, and a computer simulation of molecular maximizing. There are difficulties in evaluating theories expressed as computer programs because many arbitrary decisions must often be made in order to get the programs to operate. I therefore propose an alternative form of model that I term quasi-dynamic as a useful intermediate form of theory appropriate to our current state of knowledge about free-operant choice. Quasi-dynamic models resemble the game-theoretic analyses now commonplace in biology in that they can predict stable and unstable equilibria but not dynamic properties such as learning curves. It is possible to interpret melioration as a quasi-dynamic model. An alternative quasi-dynamic model for probabilistic choice, ratio invariance, has been proposed by Horner and Staddon. The present paper compares the predictions of melioration and ratio invariance for five experimental situations: concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules, concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules, the two-armed bandit (concurrent random-ratio schedules), and two types of frequency-dependent schedule. Neither approach easily explains all the data, but ratio invariance seems to provide a better picture of pigeons' response to probabilistic choice procedures. Ratio invariance is also more adaptive (less susceptible to “traps”) and closer to the original expression of the law of effect than pure hill-climbing processes such as momentary maximizing and melioration, although such processes may come in to play on more complex procedures that provide opportunities for temporal discrimination.     

IS THERE A DECISIVE TEST BETWEEN MATCHING AND MAXIMIZING?

Reinforcers under typical concurrent variable-interval, variable-ratio schedules may be (a) earned and obtained during the variable-interval component, (b) earned and obtained during the variable-ratio component, or (c) earned during the variable-ratio component and obtained during the variable-interval component. Categories a and b, which have no bearing on matching versus maximizing accounts of choice, were set at zero. The rate of Category c reinforcers and the duration of a changeover delay were varied. Simple matching, which predicts exclusive choice of the variable-interval component, and strict maximizing of overall reinforcement rate, which predicts a bias towards the variable-ratio component, were both disconfirmed: Subjects spent approximately 25% of their time in the variable-ratio component, contrary to the matching prediction, but earned only about one third of the reinforcers predicted by strict maximizing. However, maximizing describes the findings functionally in terms of discounting of delayed reinforcers; matching may describe the data in terms of a restructuring of the alternatives. Matching and maximizing are not competing theories about the fundamental nature of choice, but compatible points of view that may reveal environmental function and behavioral structure.     

Behavioral stereotypy and the generalized matching equation

The development of behavioral stereotypy is a common result of exposure to both response-dependent and response-independent reinforcement procedures. The generalized matching equation and two dynamic versions of that equation, which take into account the time differential between reinforcements and their effect on behavior, predict this outcome of many procedures involving reinforcement. Following from the assumption that distinct response topographies, distinct response sequences, or orientations to distinct stimuli can be treated in the equations as distinct classes of behavior, the equations predict that-at least for matching and undermatching-the behavior class that is most biased relative to other behavior classes of the same type will tend to predominate to the exclusion or near exclusion of those behavior classes.     

Use of an ambiguous-sample procedure to establish a cue to forget in pigeons

Pigeons were trained on a variation of the matching-to-sample task in which on double-sample trials two samples, one associated with each of the comparison stimuli, were presented successively. Responding to the comparison associated with the first sample was reinforced on half the double-sample trials, and responding to the comparison associated with the second sample was reinforced on the remaining half. One of two postsample stimuli was presented following the termination of each colored sample. A vertical line was presented after a correct or target sample, and a horizontal line was presented after an incorrect or interfering sample. With extended training, each bird demonstrated above-chance accuracy on double-sample trials, providing prima facie evidence that one or both of the postsample stimuli exerted control over matching behavior. Experiment 2 provided evidence that the horizontal line functioned as a cue to forget the code activated by the preceding sample stimulus. It was concluded that a condition sufficient to establish a postsample stimulus as a cue to forget is that the postsample immediately follow presentation of a sample that, if it were to control test responding, would lead to nonreinforcement.